Re-viewing the CMI Framework

Report
Re-viewing the CMI Framework
(Re-view: Take another look, see anew)
Cathy Seeley,
UCTM Conference, Nov. 4, 2011

Use the implementation of the Common Core State
Standards in Mathematics as leverage for improving
instructional practice.
CCSS-M motivates the need for new
instructional practices

Mathematical Practices

Learning Progressions (informed both by research on
children's cognitive development and by the logical structure of
mathematics)

De-fragmenting the Math (“Graph proportional relationships,
interpreting the unit rate as the slope of the graph.”)

Instructionally-demanding Verbs (“Write a function
defined by an expression in different but equivalent forms to reveal
and explain different properties of the function.”)
Naïve Perspectives on Mathematics
Instruction Reform (“Math Wars”)

Discovery learning

“Hands-on activities”

“Tons of discussion, group work, student sharing of
strategies”
Need for an instructional framework in
mathematics education

Chazan and Ball (1999) expressed frustration with
“current math education discourse about the teacher’s
role in discussion-intensive teaching.” They argue that
educators are often left “with no framework for the
kinds of specific, constructive pedagogical moves that
teachers might make.”

Stein et al. (2008) refer to a first generation of
instructional reform from which “many teachers got the
impression that in order for discussions to be focused on
student thinking, they must avoid providing any
substantive guidance at all,” and they refer to a second
generation of instructional reform “that re-asserts the
critical role of the teacher in guiding mathematical
discussions.”
Intent of the CMI (Comprehensive
Mathematics Instruction) Framework

Cognitive Demand (the nature of worthwhile tasks)

Five Practices (orchestrating mathematical discourse)

Sociomathematical Norms (teacher’s role in creating learning environments that
press for understanding)

Landscape of Learning (conceptual, procedural, representational domains of
mathematics)

NCTM Process Standards / Mathematical Practices (engaging in authentic
mathematical practice)

Learning Trajectories and Progressions (curriculum design)

Depth of Knowledge (DOK) Assessment

Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching (MKT)

Reflective Practitioner (INTASC Standards)
Three components of the
CMI Framework

The Teaching Cycle (addresses pedagogy, the learning
environment, orchestrating discourse, and formative
assessment)

The Learning Cycle (addresses the cognitive demand of
tasks, flow of the unit, content standards and learning
trajectories, process standards and mathematical
practices, formative and summative assessment)

The Continuum of Mathematical Understanding
(addresses conceptual, procedural, and representational
thinking; depth of knowledge; and assessment)
The Teaching Cycle
PEDAGOGICAL PRACTICES SUPPORTED BY THE
TEACHING CYCLE: Using Student Thinking
Anticipate
Student Thinking
Connect
Student Thinking
Select and
Sequence Student
Thinking
Monitor
Student Thinking
PEDAGOGICAL PRACTICES SUPPORTED BY THE
TEACHING CYCLE: Learning Environment
Sociomathematical
norms: criteria for
attending to and judging
the work of peers
Determine groupings:
individual, pairs,
small group
Tools to support exploration
and discourse
PEDAGOGICAL PRACTICES SUPPORTED BY THE
TEACHING CYCLE: Formative Assessment
What’s next?
What are students
taking away from the
discussion?
Have we activated appropriate
background knowledge? Provided
enough information while
maintaining the problematic
nature of the task?
When are students
ready to move to the
Discuss stage?
PEDAGOGICAL PRACTICES SUPPORTED BY THE
TEACHING CYCLE: Mathematical Discourse
Teacher’s role: Orchestrate
the structure and flow of
the discussion.
Students role:
Explain and
justify one’s own
thinking;
Clarify, describe,
compare,
question the
thinking of
others.
Teacher’s role: Launch
and clarify the task.
Teachers role: Ask questions to
engage, prompt, guide, clarify,
deepen student thinking.
The Learning Cycle

The purpose of a Develop
Understanding lesson is to surface
student thinking.

The purpose of a Solidify
Understanding lesson is to
examine and extend student
thinking.

The purpose of a Practice
Understanding lesson is to acquire
fluency and refine student thinking
– enabling students to transfer
understanding to new
“communities of practice”.
CURRICULUM DESIGN PRINCIPLES SUPPORTED
BY THE LEARNING CYCLE

What constitutes a
Worthwhile Mathematical
Task?

Contextualized or
abstract/symbolic?

Amount of scaffolding
provided?

Constraints?

Level of cognitive demand?
CURRICULUM DESIGN PRINCIPLES SUPPORTED
BY THE LEARNING CYCLE


Thinking Through a Unit

Ideas: What do we want
students to know?

Strategies: What do we want
students to be able to do?

Representations: How do we
want students to make their
thinking visible?
How do ideas, strategies
and representations differ
from the beginning to the
end of a unit of
instruction?
The Continuum of Mathematical
Understanding
KEY ASPECTS OF THE
CONTINUUM

Three distinct domains of understanding: conceptual, procedural,
and representational

Words were chosen to indicate movement across the continuum.
For example, ideas that are examined and extended become more
solid which we call concepts, and concepts that are refined and
fluent become practiced which we call definitions and properties.

This is a continuum, not discrete jumps

Ovals represent the work within teaching cycles

Left to right movement along the continuum represents movement
from specific to general, from concrete to abstract

Connections between domains creates movement along the
continuum; therefore, one can’t discuss procedures with
understanding without referring to the conceptual and
representational domains.
Design Criteria for
Learning Cycle Tasks

It will be sufficient for participants to use the criteria for cognitive demand to
select and adapt tasks to fit the learning cycle.

“Doing Mathematics” tasks generally fit the role of surfacing understanding
and make good Develop Understanding tasks.

“Procedures with Connections” tasks generally allow students to examine an
extend understanding and make good Solidify Understanding tasks.

“Procedures without Connections” tasks always focus on acquiring fluency
and may be used as Practice Understanding tasks, along with games, etc.
(Generally, low cognitive demand tasks can fit practice understanding goals, but
practice understanding tasks don’t have to be low level tasks; strategic games
can provide practice and yet be at a high level of cognitive demand. Tasks that
refine understanding generally involve modeling and other high level,
cognitively demanding work.)

similar documents